MAHADEO VISHWANATHAPPA GANDIGUDE Vs. SUNIL SHRIRAM PANDILWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order of acquittal, for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mukhed, dt. 20. 7. 2005, is assailed by the complainant claiming that the order is erroneous and contrary to the provisions of law, particularly, provisions of Section 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) LEARNED Judge, while acquitting the accused, observed that there were financial transactions in the year 1999 between the accused and the complainant for which the cheque in question was given as a security. The accused, having repaid the entire amount of the said transaction, the cheque remained with the complainant. The complainant put forward an excuse that the cheque is misplaced and will be handed over when the same is found. Thereafter, relations between the parties, being strained, the complainant under a ruse, have taken advantage of the blank signed cheque and filed a case for not having been paid amount of Rs. 95,000/- to the accused.

(3.) THE observations of the learned Judge about the cheque having been issued on 11. 2. 2003 and the presentation of the same by the complainant on 17. 2. 2003 cannot be said to be incorrect. The claim of the complainant that the presumption runs in favour of the complainant, in view of Section 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act cannot be put to quarrel. However, the accused having put a probable case during the course of evidence, he was not required, under the Statute, to step in the witness box. The observation of the learned Judge cannot be said to be erroneous. Hence, the order of acquittal does not need any interference. Leave to appeal and the appeal stands rejected.